Total Posts:28|Showing Posts:1-28
Jump to topic:

To believe the new testament

izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 8:43:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Christians tend to believe the new testament and think Jesus was born of a virgin and rose from the dead. Now lets look at this from a rational viewpoint.

First I am going to look at the raising from the dead. Now we have never seen a person raise from the dead. We don't even know that it is possible to raise from the dead, for all the morons out there no don't bring the stupid clinically dead as this is not the claim. We know the odds of this are astronomical as out of the billions of people to live no one has been confirmed to raise from the dead. That is a pretty big occasion to overcome.

We also can look at it this way. If you came home and the 3 people closest to you said that they saw Bob (who has been dead for 3 days) walking, anyone with common sense(cerebral and mig's cue to leave) would be thinking there has to be another explanation. You may not think they are lying but the most logical explanation is not that they are telling the truth. Well, if you are smart enough to grasp this, then why when it is unknown authors telling you this does it make it true. Do you trust people that you don't even know who they are and there motives over the people closest too you?

Now onto the virgin birth. We have a claim that Mary was born a virgin. Now imagine your closest female friend says they are pregnant and are having a virgin birth. You would again have trouble buying it. You would think she may have some motive for wanting who the father is secret. It is much more logical then a virgin birth. If you don't comprehend this please don't respond as you are not intellectually honest enough to have conversation with. Now, compound this with the fact that we don't know the authors again and you have the same problem. But wait, it gets even worse, in the time it was looked highly down upon to have sex as a woman if you were not married. Ruh Roh there is motive for Mary to lie, so again her lying is much more feasable then a real virgin birth. You people really need to get your act together and think how retarded this sounds when you take 2 seconds to think about it.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 8:48:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
We all know how this will pan out, the OP is a bitter lonely high school drop out who cold calls people all day for crap they don't want. To survive this he wants us to believe he is the greatest philosopher ever to have walked the earth, and that we are not worthy of conversing with him. Agree or disagree with him or his multiaccounts and he will throw abuse at you like a chimp reveling in it's own faecal matter.

This is the troll line.
________________________________________________________________
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 8:51:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Firstly, I only have one account a$$hole. Second show anywhere in this post that I am wrong and I will show that you are a complete and utter moron. Oh wait that has been proven too many times already mr. Night of the Living Dead is not about Dead bodies coming back to life.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 8:52:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 8:48:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
We all know how this will pan out, the OP is a bitter lonely high school drop out who cold calls people all day for crap they don't want. To survive this he wants us to believe he is the greatest philosopher ever to have walked the earth, and that we are not worthy of conversing with him. Agree or disagree with him or his multiaccounts and he will throw abuse at you like a chimp reveling in it's own faecal matter.

This is the troll line.
________________________________________________________________

which is why the wisest approach is to ignore him,... but between the people he bickers with and the entire threads dedicated to Izbo himself, being a troll is increasingly paying off.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 8:54:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 8:52:30 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/29/2011 8:48:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
We all know how this will pan out, the OP is a bitter lonely high school drop out who cold calls people all day for crap they don't want. To survive this he wants us to believe he is the greatest philosopher ever to have walked the earth, and that we are not worthy of conversing with him. Agree or disagree with him or his multiaccounts and he will throw abuse at you like a chimp reveling in it's own faecal matter.

This is the troll line.
________________________________________________________________

which is why the wisest approach is to ignore him,... but between the people he bickers with and the entire threads dedicated to Izbo himself, being a troll is increasingly paying off.

Oh lets be honest by even posting the troll line I am trolling, counter trolling is still trolling. Would you be interested in discussing the OP... not that I've actually read it yet.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 8:58:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 8:54:40 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 10/29/2011 8:52:30 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/29/2011 8:48:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
We all know how this will pan out, the OP is a bitter lonely high school drop out who cold calls people all day for crap they don't want. To survive this he wants us to believe he is the greatest philosopher ever to have walked the earth, and that we are not worthy of conversing with him. Agree or disagree with him or his multiaccounts and he will throw abuse at you like a chimp reveling in it's own faecal matter.

This is the troll line.
________________________________________________________________

which is why the wisest approach is to ignore him,... but between the people he bickers with and the entire threads dedicated to Izbo himself, being a troll is increasingly paying off.

Oh lets be honest by even posting the troll line I am trolling, counter trolling is still trolling. Would you be interested in discussing the OP... not that I've actually read it yet.

I have tried you don't get simple words like objective or zombie. I even give you dictionary definitions then you don't grasp that words are given meaning by people in order to communicate and as a society we came to define words. You fail to understand too many things to try to have an educated conversation. If you walked into an intellectual conversation in real life with this kind of crap you would be asked to leave and I am not joking.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 8:59:27 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 8:58:39 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/29/2011 8:54:40 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 10/29/2011 8:52:30 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/29/2011 8:48:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
We all know how this will pan out, the OP is a bitter lonely high school drop out who cold calls people all day for crap they don't want. To survive this he wants us to believe he is the greatest philosopher ever to have walked the earth, and that we are not worthy of conversing with him. Agree or disagree with him or his multiaccounts and he will throw abuse at you like a chimp reveling in it's own faecal matter.

This is the troll line.
________________________________________________________________

which is why the wisest approach is to ignore him,... but between the people he bickers with and the entire threads dedicated to Izbo himself, being a troll is increasingly paying off.

Oh lets be honest by even posting the troll line I am trolling, counter trolling is still trolling. Would you be interested in discussing the OP... not that I've actually read it yet.


I have tried you don't get simple words like objective or zombie. I even give you dictionary definitions then you don't grasp that words are given meaning by people in order to communicate and as a society we came to define words. You fail to understand too many things to try to have an educated conversation. If you walked into an intellectual conversation in real life with this kind of crap you would be asked to leave and I am not joking.

Now back to the topic that christians are being blatantly intellectually dishonest to believe the bible.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 9:10:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Final reply,

Me: Do you believe that if the entire world listened to you for moral guidance, and you wrote a great big book of moral laws that were universally accepted, and never changed, but were followed by all of humanity for evermore that such moral laws would become objective?

Izbo: It would be a moral system based on an objective set of morals
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 9:11:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 9:10:32 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
Final reply,

Me: Do you believe that if the entire world listened to you for moral guidance, and you wrote a great big book of moral laws that were universally accepted, and never changed, but were followed by all of humanity for evermore that such moral laws would become objective?

Izbo: It would be a moral system based on an objective set of morals

Thanks for showing you have no fuckin clue about my argument, now move on as my original post already said this is too advanced for an idiot like you.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 9:27:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'll bite. You make the mistake most anti-faith people do, you assume believers ignorant of the differences in definitions in the terms they use. As a matter of theological doctrine and reason, if one can prove, beyond all doubt, that x is, then it is not a matter of faith but a fact. eg Evolution is a fact, to deny it is pure ignorance.

Faith, or belief, depends upon the matter not being able to be proved to a metaphysical certitude, and making a reasonable inference based upon facts available. (Aristotle) Additionally, taking the negative as your affirmative position is a bit intellectually dishonest, but it does make for the most vociferous nattering nabobs, I believe.

Thus for people of faith the fact that beliefs cannot be proved is exactly what makes them beliefs. If rising from the dead were normal, it wouldn't require faith. My guess is that your difficulties might rest more with the dispensationalists construct, rather than with a desire to oppose religion.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 9:34:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 9:27:52 AM, logicrules wrote:
I'll bite. You make the mistake most anti-faith people do, you assume believers ignorant of the differences in definitions in the terms they use. As a matter of theological doctrine and reason, if one can prove, beyond all doubt, that x is, then it is not a matter of faith but a fact. eg Evolution is a fact, to deny it is pure ignorance.

Faith, or belief, depends upon the matter not being able to be proved to a metaphysical certitude, and making a reasonable inference based upon facts available. (Aristotle) Additionally, taking the negative as your affirmative position is a bit intellectually dishonest, but it does make for the most vociferous nattering nabobs, I believe.

Thus for people of faith the fact that beliefs cannot be proved is exactly what makes them beliefs. If rising from the dead were normal, it wouldn't require faith. My guess is that your difficulties might rest more with the dispensationalists construct, rather than with a desire to oppose religion.

Your name is a bit ironic, I am not pointing out it is definitely not true, you are totally and utterly intentionally missing the point. I am pointing out that there is no reason to believe it is true and that other explanations are much better and in any other circumstance you would know it. I am taking the base position which is disbelief. If you really cared about logic I would not have to explain simple logic to you.

I also go into why the evidence does NOT POINT TO IT HAPPENING.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 9:35:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 9:27:52 AM, logicrules wrote:
I'll bite. You make the mistake most anti-faith people do, you assume believers ignorant of the differences in definitions in the terms they use. As a matter of theological doctrine and reason, if one can prove, beyond all doubt, that x is, then it is not a matter of faith but a fact. eg Evolution is a fact, to deny it is pure ignorance.

Faith, or belief, depends upon the matter not being able to be proved to a metaphysical certitude, and making a reasonable inference based upon facts available. (Aristotle) Additionally, taking the negative as your affirmative position is a bit intellectually dishonest, but it does make for the most vociferous nattering nabobs, I believe.

Thus for people of faith the fact that beliefs cannot be proved is exactly what makes them beliefs. If rising from the dead were normal, it wouldn't require faith. My guess is that your difficulties might rest more with the dispensationalists construct, rather than with a desire to oppose religion.

Don't you care about truth, if you did you know the way to get closest to the truth is by the best available evidence.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Calvincambridge
Posts: 1,141
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 9:46:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 8:43:55 AM, izbo10 wrote:
Christians tend to believe the new testament and think Jesus was born of a virgin and rose from the dead. Now lets look at this from a rational viewpoint.

First I am going to look at the raising from the dead. Now we have never seen a person raise from the dead. We don't even know that it is possible to raise from the dead, for all the morons out there no don't bring the stupid clinically dead as this is not the claim. We know the odds of this are astronomical as out of the billions of people to live no one has been confirmed to raise from the dead. That is a pretty big occasion to overcome.

We also can look at it this way. If you came home and the 3 people closest to you said that they saw Bob (who has been dead for 3 days) walking, anyone with common sense(cerebral and mig's cue to leave) would be thinking there has to be another explanation. You may not think they are lying but the most logical explanation is not that they are telling the truth. Well, if you are smart enough to grasp this, then why when it is unknown authors telling you this does it make it true. Do you trust people that you don't even know who they are and there motives over the people closest too you?


Now onto the virgin birth. We have a claim that Mary was born a virgin. Now imagine your closest female friend says they are pregnant and are having a virgin birth. You would again have trouble buying it. You would think she may have some motive for wanting who the father is secret. It is much more logical then a virgin birth. If you don't comprehend this please don't respond as you are not intellectually honest enough to have conversation with. Now, compound this with the fact that we don't know the authors again and you have the same problem. But wait, it gets even worse, in the time it was looked highly down upon to have sex as a woman if you were not married. Ruh Roh there is motive for Mary to lie, so again her lying is much more feasable then a real virgin birth. You people really need to get your act together and think how retarded this sounds when you take 2 seconds to think about it.

Izbo I wouldent but the fact is the new testament accounts are not the same it was a one time thing. Millions of people died for this belief. Now the virgin birth I am not able to explain but still believe it. No i'm not a retard I simply have belief in supernatrual forces.
Trying to figure out women is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube with missing pieces. While blind. And on fire. And being shot.-Agent_Orange
Dude. Shades
That is all.- Thaddeus Rivers
One thing that isn't a joke though is the fact that woman are computers.Some buttons you can press and it'l work fine, but if you push the wrong one you'll get the blue screen of death.
silly, thett. girls are only good for sex. being friends with a female is of no value.-darkkermit
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 9:48:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 9:46:16 AM, Calvincambridge wrote:
At 10/29/2011 8:43:55 AM, izbo10 wrote:
Christians tend to believe the new testament and think Jesus was born of a virgin and rose from the dead. Now lets look at this from a rational viewpoint.

First I am going to look at the raising from the dead. Now we have never seen a person raise from the dead. We don't even know that it is possible to raise from the dead, for all the morons out there no don't bring the stupid clinically dead as this is not the claim. We know the odds of this are astronomical as out of the billions of people to live no one has been confirmed to raise from the dead. That is a pretty big occasion to overcome.

We also can look at it this way. If you came home and the 3 people closest to you said that they saw Bob (who has been dead for 3 days) walking, anyone with common sense(cerebral and mig's cue to leave) would be thinking there has to be another explanation. You may not think they are lying but the most logical explanation is not that they are telling the truth. Well, if you are smart enough to grasp this, then why when it is unknown authors telling you this does it make it true. Do you trust people that you don't even know who they are and there motives over the people closest too you?


Now onto the virgin birth. We have a claim that Mary was born a virgin. Now imagine your closest female friend says they are pregnant and are having a virgin birth. You would again have trouble buying it. You would think she may have some motive for wanting who the father is secret. It is much more logical then a virgin birth. If you don't comprehend this please don't respond as you are not intellectually honest enough to have conversation with. Now, compound this with the fact that we don't know the authors again and you have the same problem. But wait, it gets even worse, in the time it was looked highly down upon to have sex as a woman if you were not married. Ruh Roh there is motive for Mary to lie, so again her lying is much more feasable then a real virgin birth. You people really need to get your act together and think how retarded this sounds when you take 2 seconds to think about it.

Izbo I wouldent but the fact is the new testament accounts are not the same it was a one time thing. Millions of people died for this belief. Now the virgin birth I am not able to explain but still believe it. No i'm not a retard I simply have belief in supernatrual forces.

So, when one person dies does it make it rational to believe how bout 2? Oh wait how many people believe something is illogical as it is an argument from majority. It has nothing to do with it. In this aspect of your life you are being retarded and have no reason whatsoever to believe this bullcrap.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 9:49:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Can someone please be intellectually honest with there response.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 10:00:17 AM
Posted: 5 years ago

Don't you care about truth, if you did you know the way to get closest to the truth is by the best available evidence.

Truth, now that's an interesting term. Even the Courts recognize that no one knows the truth only facts can be known. Only if you juxtapose meanings can you call fact truth. Is the Declaration of Independence true? Are you really seeking Truth? Each of us filters what we see, hear, read and experience through internal filters making telling the truth opinion at best. However, lying is when one knows that the information they give is inaccurate and give it in order to mislead.

Short answer....no, I am interested in factual information absent subjective nuance. As to "evidence", applying the basic rules of evidence very little, if anything, in your post qualifies. Best we use fact and reason.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 10:01:44 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 10:00:17 AM, logicrules wrote:

Don't you care about truth, if you did you know the way to get closest to the truth is by the best available evidence.

Truth, now that's an interesting term. Even the Courts recognize that no one knows the truth only facts can be known. Only if you juxtapose meanings can you call fact truth. Is the Declaration of Independence true? Are you really seeking Truth? Each of us filters what we see, hear, read and experience through internal filters making telling the truth opinion at best. However, lying is when one knows that the information they give is inaccurate and give it in order to mislead.

Short answer....no, I am interested in factual information absent subjective nuance. As to "evidence", applying the basic rules of evidence very little, if anything, in your post qualifies. Best we use fact and reason.

I said fuckin be intellectually honest this is the so retarded it is not even funny.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Rusty
Posts: 2,109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 10:04:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 10:00:17 AM, logicrules wrote:

Don't you care about truth, if you did you know the way to get closest to the truth is by the best available evidence.

Truth, now that's an interesting term. Even the Courts recognize that no one knows the truth only facts can be known. Only if you juxtapose meanings can you call fact truth. Is the Declaration of Independence true? Are you really seeking Truth? Each of us filters what we see, hear, read and experience through internal filters making telling the truth opinion at best. However, lying is when one knows that the information they give is inaccurate and give it in order to mislead.

Short answer....no, I am interested in factual information absent subjective nuance. As to "evidence", applying the basic rules of evidence very little, if anything, in your post qualifies. Best we use fact and reason.

How did you come to the decision that fact and reason are the best tools to use?
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 10:07:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 10:04:10 AM, Rusty wrote:
At 10/29/2011 10:00:17 AM, logicrules wrote:

Don't you care about truth, if you did you know the way to get closest to the truth is by the best available evidence.

Truth, now that's an interesting term. Even the Courts recognize that no one knows the truth only facts can be known. Only if you juxtapose meanings can you call fact truth. Is the Declaration of Independence true? Are you really seeking Truth? Each of us filters what we see, hear, read and experience through internal filters making telling the truth opinion at best. However, lying is when one knows that the information they give is inaccurate and give it in order to mislead.

Short answer....no, I am interested in factual information absent subjective nuance. As to "evidence", applying the basic rules of evidence very little, if anything, in your post qualifies. Best we use fact and reason.

How did you come to the decision that fact and reason are the best tools to use?

Isn't he using truth to find that, it really is retarded the lengths idiots will go to defend there beliefs against evidence.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 10:08:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I also just sent him a private message telling him not to respond as if he doesnt care about truth there is no reason to discuss anything with him.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 10:21:33 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 9:34:40 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/29/2011 9:27:52 AM, logicrules wrote:
I'll bite. You make the mistake most anti-faith people do, you assume believers ignorant of the differences in definitions in the terms they use. As a matter of theological doctrine and reason, if one can prove, beyond all doubt, that x is, then it is not a matter of faith but a fact. eg Evolution is a fact, to deny it is pure ignorance.

Faith, or belief, depends upon the matter not being able to be proved to a metaphysical certitude, and making a reasonable inference based upon facts available. (Aristotle) Additionally, taking the negative as your affirmative position is a bit intellectually dishonest, but it does make for the most vociferous nattering nabobs, I believe.

Thus for people of faith the fact that beliefs cannot be proved is exactly what makes them beliefs. If rising from the dead were normal, it wouldn't require faith. My guess is that your difficulties might rest more with the dispensationalists construct, rather than with a desire to oppose religion.


Your name is a bit ironic, I am not pointing out it is definitely not true, you are totally and utterly intentionally missing the point. I am pointing out that there is no reason to believe it is true and that other explanations are much better and in any other circumstance you would know it. I am taking the base position which is disbelief. If you really cared about logic I would not have to explain simple logic to you.

I also go into why the evidence does NOT POINT TO IT HAPPENING.

You may BELIEVE whatever you choose, but by the use of the term you acknoledge you cannot prove it. (logic) No evidence points to the negative. (logic) Thus, I did not miss the point, but perhaps you do. It is perfectly reasonable to accept that, as Aritotle points out, there is at least an unmoved mover. (Diest philosophy) It is also, perfectly reasonable to accept that said mover is. It is universally accepted, by EVERY main steam theologian that there is no absolute proof for the principles of faith you point out. Hence the term FAITH. It is also universally accepted that absent affirmative evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to accept a higher power in the cosmos. If I give you too much credit for understanding logic 101 I apologize for my failure.

Thus, absent a body you can identify through dna as the Jesus of the Bible...he rose is reasonable. Virgin Birth is from Judaism, and unless you accept the existence of God, you acknowledge the inability to prove otherwise. etc. etc.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 10:24:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 10:21:33 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 10/29/2011 9:34:40 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/29/2011 9:27:52 AM, logicrules wrote:
I'll bite. You make the mistake most anti-faith people do, you assume believers ignorant of the differences in definitions in the terms they use. As a matter of theological doctrine and reason, if one can prove, beyond all doubt, that x is, then it is not a matter of faith but a fact. eg Evolution is a fact, to deny it is pure ignorance.

Faith, or belief, depends upon the matter not being able to be proved to a metaphysical certitude, and making a reasonable inference based upon facts available. (Aristotle) Additionally, taking the negative as your affirmative position is a bit intellectually dishonest, but it does make for the most vociferous nattering nabobs, I believe.

Thus for people of faith the fact that beliefs cannot be proved is exactly what makes them beliefs. If rising from the dead were normal, it wouldn't require faith. My guess is that your difficulties might rest more with the dispensationalists construct, rather than with a desire to oppose religion.


Your name is a bit ironic, I am not pointing out it is definitely not true, you are totally and utterly intentionally missing the point. I am pointing out that there is no reason to believe it is true and that other explanations are much better and in any other circumstance you would know it. I am taking the base position which is disbelief. If you really cared about logic I would not have to explain simple logic to you.

I also go into why the evidence does NOT POINT TO IT HAPPENING.

You may BELIEVE whatever you choose, but by the use of the term you acknoledge you cannot prove it. (logic) No evidence points to the negative. (logic) Thus, I did not miss the point, but perhaps you do. It is perfectly reasonable to accept that, as Aritotle points out, there is at least an unmoved mover. (Diest philosophy) It is also, perfectly reasonable to accept that said mover is. It is universally accepted, by EVERY main steam theologian that there is no absolute proof for the principles of faith you point out. Hence the term FAITH. It is also universally accepted that absent affirmative evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to accept a higher power in the cosmos. If I give you too much credit for understanding logic 101 I apologize for my failure.

Thus, absent a body you can identify through dna as the Jesus of the Bible...he rose is reasonable. Virgin Birth is from Judaism, and unless you accept the existence of God, you acknowledge the inability to prove otherwise. etc. etc.

Fucktard listen up and listen good. Saying we dont know is the reasonable thng to say, not make up some invisible sky daddy.

Now, if any other body came up missing in a grave fucktard, it would not be reasonable to think it rose, so no fucktard stop being a retard and actually think, I am sorry but until you show yourself a shred of respect don't expect me to show you any. Stop beng an intellectual equivalent to a rock and think.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
izbo10
Posts: 2,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 10:30:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 10:24:28 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/29/2011 10:21:33 AM, logicrules wrote:
At 10/29/2011 9:34:40 AM, izbo10 wrote:
At 10/29/2011 9:27:52 AM, logicrules wrote:
I'll bite. You make the mistake most anti-faith people do, you assume believers ignorant of the differences in definitions in the terms they use. As a matter of theological doctrine and reason, if one can prove, beyond all doubt, that x is, then it is not a matter of faith but a fact. eg Evolution is a fact, to deny it is pure ignorance.

Faith, or belief, depends upon the matter not being able to be proved to a metaphysical certitude, and making a reasonable inference based upon facts available. (Aristotle) Additionally, taking the negative as your affirmative position is a bit intellectually dishonest, but it does make for the most vociferous nattering nabobs, I believe.

Thus for people of faith the fact that beliefs cannot be proved is exactly what makes them beliefs. If rising from the dead were normal, it wouldn't require faith. My guess is that your difficulties might rest more with the dispensationalists construct, rather than with a desire to oppose religion.


Your name is a bit ironic, I am not pointing out it is definitely not true, you are totally and utterly intentionally missing the point. I am pointing out that there is no reason to believe it is true and that other explanations are much better and in any other circumstance you would know it. I am taking the base position which is disbelief. If you really cared about logic I would not have to explain simple logic to you.

I also go into why the evidence does NOT POINT TO IT HAPPENING.

You may BELIEVE whatever you choose, but by the use of the term you acknoledge you cannot prove it. (logic) No evidence points to the negative. (logic) Thus, I did not miss the point, but perhaps you do. It is perfectly reasonable to accept that, as Aritotle points out, there is at least an unmoved mover. (Diest philosophy) It is also, perfectly reasonable to accept that said mover is. It is universally accepted, by EVERY main steam theologian that there is no absolute proof for the principles of faith you point out. Hence the term FAITH. It is also universally accepted that absent affirmative evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to accept a higher power in the cosmos. If I give you too much credit for understanding logic 101 I apologize for my failure.

Thus, absent a body you can identify through dna as the Jesus of the Bible...he rose is reasonable. Virgin Birth is from Judaism, and unless you accept the existence of God, you acknowledge the inability to prove otherwise. etc. etc.


Fucktard listen up and listen good. Saying we dont know is the reasonable thng to say, not make up some invisible sky daddy.

Now, if any other body came up missing in a grave fucktard, it would not be reasonable to think it rose, so no fucktard stop being a retard and actually think, I am sorry but until you show yourself a shred of respect don't expect me to show you any. Stop beng an intellectual equivalent to a rock and think.

Premise 1: jesus died.

premise 2 he was placed in a grave

premise 3; the grave was empty

conclusion: we don't have a fuckin clue how it became empty.

Now, why the hell would a resurrection which we have never seen happen be the best explanation when grave robberies happened all the time.
DDO's marketing strategy has certainly paid off just not sure I agree with the target market: http://tinypic.com...
It's amazing to me that you still have yet to grasp the difference between believing something, not believing something, and having no belief at all -JCMT
To respect religion, is to disrespect the Truth!

If this board was a room and you all were the light bulbs, I'm bringing a flashlight.
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 11:02:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 8:48:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
We all know how this will pan out, the OP is a bitter lonely high school drop out who cold calls people all day for crap they don't want. To survive this he wants us to believe he is the greatest philosopher ever to have walked the earth, and that we are not worthy of conversing with him. Agree or disagree with him or his multiaccounts and he will throw abuse at you like a chimp reveling in it's own faecal matter.

This is the troll line.
I have to add that Izbo10 has a history with his tutor at home....in bed....
________________________________________________________________
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 11:07:44 AM
Posted: 5 years ago


Fucktard listen up and listen good. Saying we dont know is the reasonable thng to say, not make up some invisible sky daddy.

Now, if any other body came up missing in a grave fucktard, it would not be reasonable to think it rose, so no fucktard stop being a retard and actually think, I am sorry but until you show yourself a shred of respect don't expect me to show you any. Stop beng an intellectual equivalent to a rock and think.

Thank you, thus we have established that thought is not something with which you share familiarity, you confuse mathematics for logic, and your vocabulary is just a bit below your intellectual abilities. It seems that, if you would apply your standards to yourself you should become much improved for the effort, however establishing that a table existed might still be for you, difficult.

As a kindness

Ad hominem is a fallacy
Post hoc ergo Propter Hoc is a fallacy
ad populem is a fallacy, and emotion is to be avoided when thinking
Straw Man is common among propagandists
Absent Knowledge that Christianity is NOT a religion reasonable discourse is, at best, difficult.

I do get it, and as is often the case, when submitted to the light arguments lacking foundation, based on subjective whims and assigning to others traits more aptly applied to ourselves we get nonsense like your most recent post.

Should you be willing to give consideration to the generally accepted RULES of Logic, respond absent what looks like vindictiveness towards any who choose to have a religion based on reason and faith, please do so. I do enjoy learning things new, but name calling is never reasonable.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 11:11:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Premise 1: jesus died.

premise 2 he was placed in a grave

premise 3; the grave was empty

conclusion: we don't have a fuckin clue how it became empty.


Now, why the hell would a resurrection which we have never seen happen be the best explanation when grave robberies happened all the time.:

Your argument is precipiced on the Argument from Incredulity, which is a logical fallacy. That's the biggest problem.

Secondly, arguments about the resurection are useless for both parties (believers and non-believers alike), because nothing is verifiable for either party. We don't even know whether or not Jesus even existed, let alone whether or not the accounts are accurate even supposing he was. All we have is second or thirdhand accounts written some 70 years AFTER the alleged event, and there are no extra-biblical accounts of said execution.

If I were you, I would focus on textual and/or historical contradictions if you want to discredit it, not arguments that are entirely circumstantial at best, and purely conjectural at worst.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 2:52:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/29/2011 8:43:55 AM, izbo10 wrote:

Now onto the virgin birth...

MARY: Joseph, I'm pregnant.
JOE: You did WHAT?
MARY: I swear, I've never been unfaithful Joseph... in fact, I was TOO faithful.
JOE: Bullsh!t Mary, who were you with?
MARY: Nobody Joseph - God put it inside me with his magic non-penis.
JOE: So you'll still be nice and tight on our wedding night?
MARY: No - I'll have birthed the baby by then.
JOE: Can't God make it come out your magic non-vagina?
MARY: Sorry, that's not how it works.
JOE: But I'll still be the first man to have sex with you?
MARY: Nope. I have to be Immaculate. Doctrine says no sex for me.
JOE: Oh ok.